Sunday, June 14, 2015

Obama Is Taking Away My Right… To Write

8 But we know that the lawisgood if one uses it lawfully,9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a
righteous person, but forthelawless and insubordinate, fortheungodly and for sinners, for theunholy and profane, for murderers
of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,1 Timothy 1:8-9New King James Version (NKJV)

Obama Is
Taking Away My Right… To Write

By de Andréa, Opinion Editorialist
for ‘THE BOTTOM LINE’:

Published June 11, 2015

Your Muslim
Jihadist President has yet another oppressive trick up his sleeve.

He realizes if
he can’t ban guns outright, he might at least be able to limit your ability to
talk about them.

Illegally twisting
an international law (which doesn’t supersede our constitution by the way)
known as the ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) he is attempting
to regulate what I say about guns on the Internet, and you must know by now
that I say plenty about GUNS.

This is all
being fast tracked under the premise that talking about guns is
“exporting” data which would somehow violate the ITAR.

The NRA reports: “It’s happening again— President Obama
is using his imperial pen and telephone to curb your rights and bypass Congress
through executive action.”

Even as news reports have been highlighting the gun
control provisions of the Administration’s “Unified Agenda” of regulatory
objectives, (see accompanying story). The
Obama State Department has been quietly moving ahead with a proposal that could
censor online speech related to firearms. This latest regulatory assault,
published in the June 3 issue
of the Federal Register, is as much an affront to the First Amendment as
it is to the Second. Your action is urgently needed to ensure that online
blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and
ammunition do not become subject to prior review by State Department
bureaucrats before they can be published.

To understand the proposal and why it’s so serious,
some background information is necessary.

For the past
several years, the Administration has been pursuing a large-scale overhaul of
the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implement the federal Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The Act regulates the movement of
so-called “defense articles” and “defense services” in and out of the United
States. These articles and services are enumerated in a multi-part “U.S.
Munitions List,” which covers everything from firearms and ammunition (and
related accessories) to strategic bombers. The transnational movement of any
defense article or service on the Munitions List presumptively requires a
license from the State Department. Producers of such articles and services,
moreover, must register with the U.S. Government and pay a hefty fee for doing
so.

Also regulated
under ITAR are so-called “technical data” about defense articles.
These include, among other things, “detailed design, development, production or
manufacturing information” about firearms or ammunition. Specific
examples of technical data are blueprints, drawings, photographs, plans,
instructions or documentation.

In their current
form, the ITAR do not (as a rule) regulate technical data that are in what the
regulations call the “public domain.” Essentially, this
means data “which is published and which is generally accessible or available to
the public” through a variety of specified means. These include “at
libraries open to the public or from which the public can obtain documents.” Many
have read this provision to include material that is posted on publicly
available websites, since most public libraries these days make Internet access
available to their patrons.

The ITAR,
however, were originally promulgated in the days before the Internet. Some
State Department officials now insist that anything published online in a
generally-accessible location has essentially been “exported,” as it would
be accessible to foreign nationals both in the U.S. and overseas.

With the new
proposal published on June 3, the State Department claims to be “clarifying”
the rules concerning “technical data” posted online or
otherwise “released” into the “public
domain.” To the contrary, however, the proposal would institute a
massive new prior restraint on free speech. This is because all such releases
would require the “authorization” of the government before
they occurred. The cumbersome and time-consuming process of
obtaining such authorizations, moreover, would make online communication about
certain legal points of view and technical aspects of firearms and ammunition
essentially impossible.

Penalties for
violations are severe and for each violation could include up to 20 years in
prison and a fine of up to $1 million. Civil penalties can also be assessed.
Each unauthorized “export,” including to subsequent countries or foreign
nationals, is also treated as a separate violation.

Writers, Constitutionalists,
Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers, could all find
themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the
information they rely on to conduct these activities. Prior restraints of the
sort contemplated by this regulation are among the most illegal regulations of
speech under First Amendment case law.

But then, when
did the U.S. Constitution ever deter Barack Obama from using whatever means he
wants, to exert his will over the American people and suppress firearm
ownership throughout the nation? Like Hitler disarm the people then the
government has full control without fear of retaliation.

So what does this mean for you, the common
American?

It means if you
want to submit a review on a gun you just purchased to YouTube, or write about
the Constitutionality of the right to keep and bear arms, it could land you in
prison.

A fine of up to
$1 million dollars are foreseeable if you so much as comment on ammo, magazines,
tactics, or anything similar.

You can
definitely see this is as another federal tune up to get us underneath the
thumb of an out of control criminal government.
Arms in the hands of a free people are necessary to the security of a
Free State. Without them we are certain
to lose our Free State for good.

Some maintain
this won’t be enforceable. Even if that is true,and let’s hope it is, the problem here
is the precedent being set by Obama’s Federal Gestapo. They’re slowly trying to
chip away at our liberties when they should be doing everything they can to strengthen
and support them.

Is this why you voted
for them?

THE BOTTOM LINE:My response to the Muslim Jihadist Obama…”GO
SUCK AN EGG!” I am under two laws in
this world, the first is the Ten Commandments, and the second is the U.S. Constitution. I will die at my keyboard writing the truth
and what is on my mind, before I will ever bow in subjection to a Muslim. President or no!

Come and get me
Obama but you had better bring your SS Gestapo with you... I have already had
threats from your ISIS Brotherhood sons of Satan and they don’t scare me
either, it just emboldens me.

In case you missed it at the top: 8 But we know that the lawisgood if one uses it lawfully,9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a
righteous person, but forthelawless and insubordinate, fortheungodly and for sinners, for theunholy and profane, for murderers
of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,1 Timothy 1:8-9New King James Version (NKJV)

Thanks for
listening – de Andréa

Please pass on this
article to everyone on your email list.
It may be the only chance for your friends to hear the truth.